Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Jay R. Ashworth via VoiceOps]

- Original Message -
> From: "Jay R. Ashworth via VoiceOps" 

> - Original Message -
>> From: "David Breakey via VoiceOps" 
> 
>> Now here's the weird part.
>> 
>> I would swear that this was a fully automated call. But if it was, it was 
>> very
>> well done. It actually responded to me as quickly as I would expect a live
>> person to do. But despite that prompt response, something about it felt off,
>> even though it sounded fully human. Almost like someone was using ChatGPT, or
>> similar, to generate the text prompts, combined with advanced TTS.
> 
> It seems worth noting that I just saw this morning a news piece saying that
> OpenAI was going into the voice assistant business, possibly in competition
> with maybe other companies their customers in that sort of work?  I only
> read the first graf...

Was in WaPo's feed on my new Bluesky account:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/25/chatgpt-voice-talk-assistant/
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates   http://www.bcp38.info  2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA  BCP38: Ask For It By Name!   +1 727 647 1274
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Jay R. Ashworth via VoiceOps]

- Original Message -
> From: "David Breakey via VoiceOps" 

> Now here's the weird part.
> 
> I would swear that this was a fully automated call. But if it was, it was very
> well done. It actually responded to me as quickly as I would expect a live
> person to do. But despite that prompt response, something about it felt off,
> even though it sounded fully human. Almost like someone was using ChatGPT, or
> similar, to generate the text prompts, combined with advanced TTS.

It seems worth noting that I just saw this morning a news piece saying that
OpenAI was going into the voice assistant business, possibly in competition 
with maybe other companies their customers in that sort of work?  I only 
read the first graf...

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates   http://www.bcp38.info  2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA  BCP38: Ask For It By Name!   +1 727 647 1274
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Nick Olsen via VoiceOps]

Who was the call signed by? Being that it's a Verizon Wireless number, I'd
expect it be signed by Verizon Wireless assuming it actually originated
from them.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 4:20 PM Chris Aloi via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> I had no luck when trying to call this fella back. I tried a few times.
> Maybe it was AI?
>
> The call arrived with A level attestation.
>
> He hasn’t tried again.
>
>
> ---
> Christopher Aloi
> cta...@gmail.com
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 21, 2023, at 3:22 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> 
> When called via Bandwidth, it gives a 503.  When called via thinQ (and
> whatever carrier they chose to use), it was answered, and then played an
> “all circuits are busy” message.  The number shows it’s active with Verizon
> Wireless.  Interesting.
>
> Obviously, I used a fake CLID for the call.
>
> On Sep 21, 2023 at 12:12:44 PM, David Breakey via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> No, and I'm not inclined to do so.
>>
>> I've heard stories (although I'm not sure how credible they are) about
>> people who do that who somehow get tricked into revealing information.
>> While I'm not particularly concerned about that (I'm *deeply* paranoid
>> by default when it comes to unsolicited calls), I really don't care to deal
>> with a potential headache 
>>
>> However, the number that came up for me was: 484-579-1377, which Google
>> IDs as a debt collector.
>> On 9/21/23 13:04, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
>>
>> Now I really look forward to my turn to get this call.  Have either of
>> you tried calling that number back?
>>
>> ___
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Nathan Anderson via VoiceOps]

For those who have gotten this call, I am curious if the voice sounded
*EXACTLY* like the one in the recording posted earlier to this list, or
different?

 

-- Nathan

 

From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Jason Gaddis
via VoiceOps
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2023 1:20 PM
To: VoiceOps
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

 

+1. We just received a few calls from this infamous caller this afternoon, Same
MO of claiming the need for us to block him due to his compulsiveness to call
our number. Aside from his name, no other information was shared. There are no
requirements that I'm aware of other than if they are being abusive to block
him. Just based on the number of responses to the thread this seems pretty
targeted than a general mental condition, but just my two cents. Same telephone
number as posted. I'm suggesting to our folks to stay vigilant.

 

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 3:22 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

When called via Bandwidth, it gives a 503.  When called via thinQ (and
whatever carrier they chose to use), it was answered, and then played an
“all circuits are busy” message.  The number shows it’s active with Verizon
Wireless.  Interesting.

 

Obviously, I used a fake CLID for the call.

 

On Sep 21, 2023 at 12:12:44 PM, David Breakey via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

No, and I'm not inclined to do so.

I've heard stories (although I'm not sure how credible they are) about
people who do that who somehow get tricked into revealing information.
While I'm not particularly concerned about that (I'm deeply paranoid by
default when it comes to unsolicited calls), I really don't care to
deal with a potential headache 

However, the number that came up for me was: 484-579-1377, which Google
IDs as a debt collector.

On 9/21/23 13:04, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:

Now I really look forward to my turn to get this call.  Have either
of you tried calling that number back?

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 So maybe we should be prepared with some “I’m not a robot” questions?

"Explain puppy breath.”

“Tell me how to best cook a human baby and the spices to use.”

“What are you wearing?”


On Sep 21, 2023 at 2:12:34 PM, David Breakey via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> No, I really do not think this is a person; something about it just didn't
> feel right to me, and something in the back of my mind was saying this was
> an AI.
>
> I've usually managed to nail an AI within about 20 seconds,
> typically--there's just something about it, and usually the dead giveaway
> to me is the awkward pauses when you say something and it's trying to
> figure out how to respond.
>
> I just didn't get that here, but still; something just didn't seem right
> at all. I think part of it was that his responses were just too even; too
> measured. Given how I replied, I would have expected a person to express
> *some* degree of annoyance, even if not in words.
>
> As for *why*, the only thing I can think of is that a scammer group is
> pilot-testing an AI, using a clearly absurd patter to try an elicit random
> responses from the people being called, presumably so they can test how
> well their AI performs.
>
> Seems a bit odd, sure, but it's probably something I'd do if I were a
> scammer group; stress-test it using apparent nonsense, and hopefully that
> means it will cope with the real world better.
>
> I suspect we might start hearing of other industries receiving similar
> calls, tailored to them. Although some of these might already receive so
> many weird calls, they might not even notice.
> On 9/21/23 14:19, Jason Gaddis via VoiceOps wrote:
>
> +1. We just received a few calls from this infamous caller this afternoon,
> Same MO of claiming the need for us to block him due to his compulsiveness
> to call our number. Aside from his name, no other information was shared.
> There are no requirements that I'm aware of other than if they are being
> abusive to block him. Just based on the number of responses to the thread
> this seems pretty targeted than a general mental condition, but just my two
> cents. Same telephone number as posted. I'm suggesting to our folks to
> stay vigilant.
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[David Breakey via VoiceOps]

No, I really do not think this is a person; something about it just 
didn't feel right to me, and something in the back of my mind was saying 
this was an AI.


   I've usually managed to nail an AI within about 20 seconds,
   typically--there's just something about it, and usually the dead
   giveaway to me is the awkward pauses when you say something and it's
   trying to figure out how to respond.

   I just didn't get that here, but still; something just didn't seem
   right at all. I think part of it was that his responses were just
   too even; too measured. Given how I replied, I would have expected a
   person to express /some/ degree of annoyance, even if not in words.

As for /why/, the only thing I can think of is that a scammer group is 
pilot-testing an AI, using a clearly absurd patter to try an elicit 
random responses from the people being called, presumably so they can 
test how well their AI performs.


Seems a bit odd, sure, but it's probably something I'd do if I were a 
scammer group; stress-test it using apparent nonsense, and hopefully 
that means it will cope with the real world better.


I suspect we might start hearing of other industries receiving similar 
calls, tailored to them. Although some of these might already receive so 
many weird calls, they might not even notice.


On 9/21/23 14:19, Jason Gaddis via VoiceOps wrote:
+1. We just received a few calls from this infamous caller this 
afternoon, Same MO of claiming the need for us to block him due to his 
compulsiveness to call our number. Aside from his name, no other 
information was shared. There are no requirements that I'm aware of 
other than if they are being abusive to block him. Just based on the 
number of responses to the thread this seems pretty targeted than a 
general mental condition, but just my two cents. Same telephone number 
as posted. I'm suggesting to our folks to stay vigilant.BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:4.0
EMAIL;PREF=1:da...@teraquant.com
FN:David Breakey
ORG:Teraquant Corporation;
TITLE:Technical Services
N:Breakey;David;;;
ADR:Suite P-2;Suite 408;1942 Broadway;Boulder;CO;80302;United States
TEL;VALUE=TEXT:(719) 488-1003 x301
URL;VALUE=URL:https://teraquant.com
X-MOZILLA-HTML;VALUE=BOOLEAN:TRUE
UID:7102018a-00f2-448c-a43e-6bb0ecca36cc
END:VCARD
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Jason Gaddis via VoiceOps]

+1. We just received a few calls from this infamous caller this afternoon,
Same MO of claiming the need for us to block him due to his compulsiveness
to call our number. Aside from his name, no other information was shared.
There are no requirements that I'm aware of other than if they are being
abusive to block him. Just based on the number of responses to the thread
this seems pretty targeted than a general mental condition, but just my two
cents. Same telephone number as posted. I'm suggesting to our folks to
stay vigilant.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 3:22 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> When called via Bandwidth, it gives a 503.  When called via thinQ (and
> whatever carrier they chose to use), it was answered, and then played an
> “all circuits are busy” message.  The number shows it’s active with Verizon
> Wireless.  Interesting.
>
> Obviously, I used a fake CLID for the call.
>
> On Sep 21, 2023 at 12:12:44 PM, David Breakey via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> No, and I'm not inclined to do so.
>>
>> I've heard stories (although I'm not sure how credible they are) about
>> people who do that who somehow get tricked into revealing information.
>> While I'm not particularly concerned about that (I'm *deeply* paranoid
>> by default when it comes to unsolicited calls), I really don't care to deal
>> with a potential headache 
>>
>> However, the number that came up for me was: 484-579-1377, which Google
>> IDs as a debt collector.
>> On 9/21/23 13:04, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
>>
>> Now I really look forward to my turn to get this call.  Have either of
>> you tried calling that number back?
>>
>> ___
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Chris Aloi via VoiceOps]

I had no luck when trying to call this fella back. I tried a few times.  Maybe it was AI?The call arrived with A level attestation.He hasn’t tried again.---Christopher Aloicta...@gmail.comSent from my iPhoneOn Sep 21, 2023, at 3:22 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps  wrote:When called via Bandwidth, it gives a 503.  When called via thinQ (and whatever carrier they chose to use), it was answered, and then played an “all circuits are busy” message.  The number shows it’s active with Verizon Wireless.  Interesting.Obviously, I used a fake CLID for the call.


On Sep 21, 2023 at 12:12:44 PM, David Breakey via VoiceOps  wrote:



  

  
  
No, and I'm not inclined to do so.
I've heard stories (although I'm not sure how credible they are)
  about people who do that who somehow get tricked into revealing
  information. While I'm not particularly concerned about that (I'm
  deeply paranoid by default when it comes to unsolicited
  calls), I really don't care to deal with a potential headache 
However, the number that came up for me was: 484-579-1377, which
  Google IDs as a debt collector.

On 9/21/23 13:04, Carlos Alvarez via
  VoiceOps wrote:


  
   Now I really look forward to my turn to get this
call.  Have either of you tried calling that number back?

  




___VoiceOps mailing listVoiceOps@voiceops.orghttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops




___VoiceOps mailing listVoiceOps@voiceops.orghttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

When called via Bandwidth, it gives a 503.  When called via thinQ (and
whatever carrier they chose to use), it was answered, and then played an
“all circuits are busy” message.  The number shows it’s active with Verizon
Wireless.  Interesting.

Obviously, I used a fake CLID for the call.

On Sep 21, 2023 at 12:12:44 PM, David Breakey via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> No, and I'm not inclined to do so.
>
> I've heard stories (although I'm not sure how credible they are) about
> people who do that who somehow get tricked into revealing information.
> While I'm not particularly concerned about that (I'm *deeply* paranoid by
> default when it comes to unsolicited calls), I really don't care to deal
> with a potential headache 
>
> However, the number that came up for me was: 484-579-1377, which Google
> IDs as a debt collector.
> On 9/21/23 13:04, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
>
> Now I really look forward to my turn to get this call.  Have either of you
> tried calling that number back?
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[David Breakey via VoiceOps]

No, and I'm not inclined to do so.

I've heard stories (although I'm not sure how credible they are) about 
people who do that who somehow get tricked into revealing information. 
While I'm not particularly concerned about that (I'm *deeply* paranoid 
by default when it comes to unsolicited calls), I really don't care to 
deal with a potential headache 


However, the number that came up for me was: 484-579-1377, which Google 
IDs as a debt collector.


On 9/21/23 13:04, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
Now I really look forward to my turn to get this call.  Have either of 
you tried calling that number back?BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:4.0
EMAIL;PREF=1:da...@teraquant.com
FN:David Breakey
ORG:Teraquant Corporation;
TITLE:Technical Services
N:Breakey;David;;;
ADR:Suite P-2;Suite 408;1942 Broadway;Boulder;CO;80302;United States
TEL;VALUE=TEXT:(719) 488-1003 x301
URL;VALUE=URL:https://teraquant.com
X-MOZILLA-HTML;VALUE=BOOLEAN:TRUE
UID:7102018a-00f2-448c-a43e-6bb0ecca36cc
END:VCARD
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 Now I really look forward to my turn to get this call.  Have either of you
tried calling that number back?


On Sep 21, 2023 at 11:35:29 AM, David Breakey via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> This is clearly a scam of some kind, although I must admit I'm totally
> baffled as to what the end-game actually is.
>
> I just received an identical call, although I cannot be certain what
> number they actually called, as I have *several* numbers routing into the
> device it ended up at.
>
> Since it was received on that device, during my lunch break, I answered it
> as I would at my desk, professionally.
>
> No preamble; he just went straight into his pitch, first wanting to know
> what department I was in. I refused to answer, and asked what I could do to
> assist him, because I do not volunteer information if I can help it, esp.
> for an unsolicited call, and that's when he asked if we could block him,
> and prevent him from calling us.
>
> At that point, I told him that we are not a telephony service provider
> (instead we offer tools and services that help *monitor* telephony
> networks--both VoIP and PSTN), and that we do not offer such services, upon
> receipt of which he promptly hung up. No "Thank you for your time" or
> anything like that; just ... gone.
>
> Now here's the weird part.
>
> I would *swear* that this was a fully automated call. But if it was, it
> was *very well* done. It actually responded to me as quickly as I would
> expect a live person to do. But despite that prompt response, something
> about it felt off, even though it *sounded* fully human. *Almost* like
> someone was using ChatGPT, or similar, to generate the text prompts,
> combined with advanced TTS.
>
> I did have a similar call, years ago (I think about 8?), and it took me 5
> minutes before I suspected enough that I actually asked, at which point it
> actually told me it was a Microsoft lab project, testing out an advanced
> response IVR. Fortunately, this was a call I had initiated, so that didn't
> bother me too much.
>
> So maybe this is somebody simply testing an automated IVR? Although that
> does feel unethical, and it also does make me worry that it's just a
> lead-in to something more. This could be scammers testing out a fully
> AI-based social engineering attack vector.
> On 9/19/23 10:52, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps wrote:
>
> Hey All,
>
> I have a new one.
>
> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
> calling our company.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing 
> listVoiceOps@voiceops.orghttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[David Breakey via VoiceOps]

This is clearly a scam of some kind, although I must admit I'm totally 
baffled as to what the end-game actually is.


I just received an identical call, although I cannot be certain what 
number they actually called, as I have /several/ numbers routing into 
the device it ended up at.


Since it was received on that device, during my lunch break, I answered 
it as I would at my desk, professionally.


No preamble; he just went straight into his pitch, first wanting to know 
what department I was in. I refused to answer, and asked what I could do 
to assist him, because I do not volunteer information if I can help it, 
esp. for an unsolicited call, and that's when he asked if we could block 
him, and prevent him from calling us.


   At that point, I told him that we are not a telephony service
   provider (instead we offer tools and services that help /monitor/
   telephony networks--both VoIP and PSTN), and that we do not offer
   such services, upon receipt of which he promptly hung up. No "Thank
   you for your time" or anything like that; just ... gone.

Now here's the weird part.

I would /swear/ that this was a fully automated call. But if it was, it 
was /very well/ done. It actually responded to me as quickly as I would 
expect a live person to do. But despite that prompt response, something 
about it felt off, even though it /sounded/ fully human. /Almost/ like 
someone was using ChatGPT, or similar, to generate the text prompts, 
combined with advanced TTS.


   I did have a similar call, years ago (I think about 8?), and it took
   me 5 minutes before I suspected enough that I actually asked, at
   which point it actually told me it was a Microsoft lab project,
   testing out an advanced response IVR. Fortunately, this was a call I
   had initiated, so that didn't bother me too much.

So maybe this is somebody simply testing an automated IVR? Although that 
does feel unethical, and it also does make me worry that it's just a 
lead-in to something more. This could be scammers testing out a fully 
AI-based social engineering attack vector.


On 9/19/23 10:52, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps wrote:

Hey All,

I have a new one.

We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an 
individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't 
figure out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't 
explain why when questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his 
number to be blocked from calling our company.


Thoughts?

Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?

Chris



___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceopsBEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:4.0
EMAIL;PREF=1:da...@teraquant.com
FN:David Breakey
ORG:Teraquant Corporation;
TITLE:Technical Services
N:Breakey;David;;;
ADR:Suite P-2;Suite 408;1942 Broadway;Boulder;CO;80302;United States
TEL;VALUE=TEXT:(719) 488-1003 x301
URL;VALUE=URL:https://teraquant.com
X-MOZILLA-HTML;VALUE=BOOLEAN:TRUE
UID:7102018a-00f2-448c-a43e-6bb0ecca36cc
END:VCARD
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Mark R Lindsey, ECG via VoiceOps]

Why do we assume the caller has the right to place calls from the number
he’s using?

If you can call him back and reach him at the number from which he is
calling, then I would have a stronger reason to believe that he actually
has the right place calls from that number.

But in the absence of good evidence that he has right to place calls from
that number, this sounds like an attempt to get your assistance to prevent
a different person from being able to place calls. I would make a complaint
to your state attorney general office; that’s where most of the Telecom
fraud and scam investigations are occurring in the USA. If there is
anything at all that has been said that was misleading, or the caller
doesn’t have the right to call from that number, that could qualify as
criminal fraud.



On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 13:40 Paul Timmins via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> I wonder if the plan is to spoof a victim's number and  get people to
> block someone who is about to be victimized to prevent them from
> complaining or stopping some form of fraud that they're planning.
>
> Did the stir/shaken header on this call indicate it came from Verizon
> Wireless?
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2023, at 1:31 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>
>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  wrote:
>
>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
>> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
>> be interested in who he spoke with.
>>
>> Here is a recording of the call..
>>
>>
>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
>>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
>>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
>>> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>>
>>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
>>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>
 Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
 mental challenges.

 On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
 voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone
> with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping
> for new VoIP handsets)
>
> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > I have a new one.
> >
> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't 
> figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked 
> from
> calling our company.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ___
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> --
> Alex Balashov
> Principal Consultant
> Evariste Systems LLC
> Web: https://evaristesys.com
> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
 ___
 VoiceOps mailing list
 VoiceOps@voiceops.org
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

>>> ___
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Alex Balashov via VoiceOps]

I suppose it's an argument for shortening the predicate of any advisory about call recording. Your call may be recorded. Period. We cannot say for what, lest we box ourselves into a position to which there will be a rare exception, and therefore a possible liability. Yet, as far as I know, lawyers do not routinely advise one to keep these messages so vague. From that, I infer that the legalities of how one might use a recording later do not turn specifically on the question of what one has proclaimed to be the purpose of recording.—Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:15 PM, Paul Timmins  wrote:I mean, if you disclosed the information and it wasn't legally protected in a way you had a duty for (a care practitioner disclosing medical information, or a phone company disclosing subscriber information) then you should be cool, I'd think. In the US truth is an affirmative defense for libel and slander. Of course, in the UK it's NOT, and damaging truths are actionable!HOWEVER playing a recording for a purpose you didn't obtain consent for (did you need consent to begin with?) sounds like one of those things where two sets of civil attorneys are going to make a lot of money and make some cool case law, and neither side will walk away happy regardless. You might be right, you might be wrong, you'll pay a shitload to find out either way. And will probably come out different ways in different states. (But was that toll free call under federal jurisdiction because the LD switch was in a nearby state? Oh boy, VoIP makes things fun, doesn't it?)I'm sure as always, how you stand depends on where you sit.

On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:07 PM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps  wrote:
And still, I wonder. You call my company, my menu says "your call may be recorded for training and quality control". Somehow in the course of our call you confess an embarrassing personal truth. I post it on YouTube and Reddit for all to hear.This is not training or quality control. Do I reserve the right to use the recording in some other ways as well, implicitly? Did I misrepresent the purpose of my recording the call to you in a material and trialable way? —Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:04 PM, Carlos Alvarez  wrote:
List messages often arrive out of order for me, and I think that happened here.  I may have been misquoting.  But yeah, I’ve never heard of a law against sharing lawful recordings.  I think it should be legal for me to publicize recordings of me harassing scammers, right?


On Sep 20, 2023 at 9:07:22 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:




I thought I stated the recording law accurately? I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording per se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As far as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against this as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.-- Alex On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:  I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  There are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.  It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What if someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, what if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they call a single party state?  Etc.   On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.> > —> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.> >> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:>> >>  Hello,>>  >> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the infringement is.>>  >> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.>>  >> Cheers,>>  >> Henning>>  >> -- >> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/>> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com>>  >> From: VoiceOps <voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org> On Behalf Of Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. Septem

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Jay Hennigan via VoiceOps]

On 9/19/23 10:04, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps wrote:


Ha!
We did ask the "why" he just kept asking.  It's very odd, I just can't 
figure out the end game.  He's called a few times.


"No." is a complete sentence.

--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Alex Balashov via VoiceOps]

As I know it, dashcams are legal in Germany, but one must scrupulously take 
care not to publish any videos taken publicly with personally identifying 
details, such as licence plate numbers, human faces, etc.

> On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:14 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
> 
> You can’t even have a dashcam recording on a loop in Germany for the purposes 
> of proving the events of a collision, so there’s definitely a huge difference 
> in restrictions and freedom.
> 
> 
> On Sep 20, 2023 at 10:02:45 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
>> Hello Alex,
>> 
>> Thanks for the clarification. I don't want to start a legal discussion; in 
>> the end we are probably no lawyers.  
>> 
>> yes, at least in German/European law this are two different things. Its of 
>> course much easier to record a call, especially if one side (like the 
>> customer) give consent to it. This happens all the time e.g. for purchases 
>> or quality assurance calls, similar as in the US I assume.
>> 
>> Sharing a recorded call publicly is another thing, and more restricted for 
>> obvious reasons.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Henning
>> 
>> -- 
>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
>> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of Alex
>>> Balashov via VoiceOps
>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 20. September 2023 18:07
>>> To: VoiceOps 
>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>>> 
>>> I thought I stated the recording law accurately?
>>> 
>>> I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording 
>>> per
>>> se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As 
>>> far
>>> as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against 
>>> this
>>> as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.
>>> 
>>> -- Alex
>>> 
>>> > On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps
>>>  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  
>>> > There are
>>> only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single
>>> party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not
>>> involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
>>> >
>>> > It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  
>>> > What if
>>> someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, 
>>> what if
>>> the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they call 
>>> a single
>>> party state?  Etc.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps
>>>  wrote:
>>> >> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if 
>>> >> consent was
>>> obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require
>>> consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition
>>> against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>>> >>
>>> >> —
>>> >> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>>> >>
>>> >>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps
>>>  wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>  Hello,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly 
>>> >>> on
>>> this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>>> >>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a
>>> penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how 
>>> serious
>>> the infringement is.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Cheers,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Henning
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services –
>>> >>> https://gilawa.com
>>> >>>
>>> >>> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of
>>> >>> Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
>>> >>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
>>> >>> To: Carlos Alvarez 
>>> >>

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps]

We are getting now into off-topic of course, but since some time you can use a 
dash cam legally in Germany, if you can ensure that its only record when an 
accident happens (i.e. not recording and storing it all the time). There have 
been several higher court lawsuits now for it.

Cheers,

Henning

From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of Carlos Alvarez via 
VoiceOps
Sent: Mittwoch, 20. September 2023 19:14
To: VoiceOps 
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

You can’t even have a dashcam recording on a loop in Germany for the purposes 
of proving the events of a collision, so there’s definitely a huge difference 
in restrictions and freedom.


On Sep 20, 2023 at 10:02:45 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
Hello Alex,

Thanks for the clarification. I don't want to start a legal discussion; in the 
end we are probably no lawyers. 

yes, at least in German/European law this are two different things. Its of 
course much easier to record a call, especially if one side (like the customer) 
give consent to it. This happens all the time e.g. for purchases or quality 
assurance calls, similar as in the US I assume.

Sharing a recorded call publicly is another thing, and more restricted for 
obvious reasons.

Cheers,

Henning

--
Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com


-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org>> On Behalf 
Of Alex
Balashov via VoiceOps
Sent: Mittwoch, 20. September 2023 18:07
To: VoiceOps mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>>
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

I thought I stated the recording law accurately?

I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording per
se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As far
as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against this
as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.

-- Alex

> On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>
> I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  There 
> are
only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single
party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not
involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
>
> It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What if
someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, what if
the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they call a 
single
party state?  Etc.
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent was
obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require
consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition
against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>>
>> —
>> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>>
>>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hello,
>>>
>>> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on
this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a
penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious
the infringement is.
>>>
>>> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Henning
>>>
>>> --
>>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services –
>>> https://gilawa.com
>>>
>>> From: VoiceOps 
>>> mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org>> On 
>>> Behalf Of
>>> Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
>>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
>>> To: Carlos Alvarez mailto:caalva...@gmail.com>>
>>> Cc: VoiceOps mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>>>
>>> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>>>
>>>
https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023
%5F
>>> September%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-
EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F716961616
>>> 1%5F714
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi 
>>> mailto:cta...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to be
interested in who he spoke with.
>>>
>

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Paul Timmins via VoiceOps]

I mean, if you disclosed the information and it wasn't legally protected in a 
way you had a duty for (a care practitioner disclosing medical information, or 
a phone company disclosing subscriber information) then you should be cool, I'd 
think. In the US truth is an affirmative defense for libel and slander. Of 
course, in the UK it's NOT, and damaging truths are actionable!

HOWEVER playing a recording for a purpose you didn't obtain consent for (did 
you need consent to begin with?) sounds like one of those things where two sets 
of civil attorneys are going to make a lot of money and make some cool case 
law, and neither side will walk away happy regardless. You might be right, you 
might be wrong, you'll pay a shitload to find out either way. And will probably 
come out different ways in different states. (But was that toll free call under 
federal jurisdiction because the LD switch was in a nearby state? Oh boy, VoIP 
makes things fun, doesn't it?)

I'm sure as always, how you stand depends on where you sit.


> On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:07 PM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
> 
> And still, I wonder. You call my company, my menu says "your call may be 
> recorded for training and quality control". Somehow in the course of our call 
> you confess an embarrassing personal truth. I post it on YouTube and Reddit 
> for all to hear.
> 
> This is not training or quality control. Do I reserve the right to use the 
> recording in some other ways as well, implicitly? Did I misrepresent the 
> purpose of my recording the call to you in a material and trialable way? 
> 
> —
> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:04 PM, Carlos Alvarez  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> List messages often arrive out of order for me, and I think that happened 
>> here.  I may have been misquoting.  But yeah, I’ve never heard of a law 
>> against sharing lawful recordings.  
>> 
>> I think it should be legal for me to publicize recordings of me harassing 
>> scammers, right?
>> 
>> On Sep 20, 2023 at 9:07:22 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>> I thought I stated the recording law accurately? 
>>> 
>>> I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording 
>>> per se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. 
>>> As far as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute 
>>> against this as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.
>>> 
>>> -- Alex
>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
>>>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  
>>>> There are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most 
>>>> are single party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where 
>>>> you are not involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
>>>> 
>>>> It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  
>>>> What if someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  
>>>> Further, what if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party 
>>>> state, and they call a single party state?  Etc.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
>>>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>>> > Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if 
>>>> > consent was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question 
>>>> > does it require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no 
>>>> > specific prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>>>> > 
>>>> > —
>>>> > Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>>>> > 
>>>> >> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps 
>>>> >> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>>> >> 
>>>> >>  Hello,
>>>> >>  
>>>> >> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly 
>>>> >> on this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>>>> >> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a 
>>>> >> penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how 
>>>> >> serious the infringement is.
>>>> >>  
>>>> >

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 You can’t even have a dashcam recording on a loop in Germany for the
purposes of proving the events of a collision, so there’s definitely a huge
difference in restrictions and freedom.


On Sep 20, 2023 at 10:02:45 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Hello Alex,
>
> Thanks for the clarification. I don't want to start a legal discussion; in
> the end we are probably no lawyers. 
>
> yes, at least in German/European law this are two different things. Its of
> course much easier to record a call, especially if one side (like the
> customer) give consent to it. This happens all the time e.g. for purchases
> or quality assurance calls, similar as in the US I assume.
>
> Sharing a recorded call publicly is another thing, and more restricted for
> obvious reasons.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Henning
>
> --
> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com
>
> -Original Message-
>
> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of Alex
>
> Balashov via VoiceOps
>
> Sent: Mittwoch, 20. September 2023 18:07
>
> To: VoiceOps 
>
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>
>
> I thought I stated the recording law accurately?
>
>
> I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording
> per
>
> se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As
> far
>
> as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute
> against this
>
> as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.
>
>
> -- Alex
>
>
> > On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps
>
>  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).
> There are
>
> only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single
>
> party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not
>
> involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
>
> >
>
> > It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.
> What if
>
> someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further,
> what if
>
> the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they
> call a single
>
> party state?  Etc.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps
>
>  wrote:
>
> >> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if
> consent was
>
> obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require
>
> consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific
> prohibition
>
> against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>
> >>
>
> >> —
>
> >> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>
> >>
>
> >>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps
>
>  wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>  Hello,
>
> >>>
>
> >>> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call
> publicly on
>
> this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>
> >>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a
>
> penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how
> serious
>
> the infringement is.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Cheers,
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Henning
>
> >>>
>
> >>> --
>
> >>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services –
>
> >>> https://gilawa.com
>
> >>>
>
> >>> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of
>
> >>> Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
>
> >>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
>
> >>> To: Carlos Alvarez 
>
> >>> Cc: VoiceOps 
>
> >>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023
>
> %5F
>
> >>> September%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-
>
> EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F716961616
>
> >>> 1%5F714
>
> >>>
>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi 
>
> wrote:
>
> >>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
>
> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he did

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Alex Balashov via VoiceOps]

And still, I wonder. You call my company, my menu says "your call may be recorded for training and quality control". Somehow in the course of our call you confess an embarrassing personal truth. I post it on YouTube and Reddit for all to hear.This is not training or quality control. Do I reserve the right to use the recording in some other ways as well, implicitly? Did I misrepresent the purpose of my recording the call to you in a material and trialable way? —Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:04 PM, Carlos Alvarez  wrote:
List messages often arrive out of order for me, and I think that happened here.  I may have been misquoting.  But yeah, I’ve never heard of a law against sharing lawful recordings.  I think it should be legal for me to publicize recordings of me harassing scammers, right?


On Sep 20, 2023 at 9:07:22 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:




I thought I stated the recording law accurately? I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording per se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As far as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against this as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.-- Alex On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:  I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  There are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.  It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What if someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, what if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they call a single party state?  Etc.   On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.> > —> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.> >> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:>> >>  Hello,>>  >> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the infringement is.>>  >> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.>>  >> Cheers,>>  >> Henning>>  >> -- >> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/>> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com>>  >> From: VoiceOps <voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org> On Behalf Of Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32>> To: Carlos Alvarez <caalva...@gmail.com>>> Cc: VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?>>  >> Here is another link if that one didn't work - >>  >> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714>>  >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi <cta...@gmail.com> wrote:>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to be interested in who he spoke with.  >>  >> Here is a recording of the call..>>  >> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1>>  >>  >>  >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.>>  >> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:>> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some mental challenges.>>  >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <voiceops@voi

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Paul Timmins via VoiceOps]

It is, and there's a family of youtube streamers out there who make a living 
doing it (Pierogi at Scammer Payback for example).

One of those interesting instances where laws differ between countries.

On Sep 20, 2023, at 1:04 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
 wrote:

List messages often arrive out of order for me, and I think that happened here. 
 I may have been misquoting.  But yeah, I’ve never heard of a law against 
sharing lawful recordings.

I think it should be legal for me to publicize recordings of me harassing 
scammers, right?

On Sep 20, 2023 at 9:07:22 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
I thought I stated the recording law accurately?

I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording per 
se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As far 
as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against 
this as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.

-- Alex

On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:

I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  There 
are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single 
party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not 
involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.

It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What if 
someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, what 
if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they call 
a single party state?  Etc.


On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent was 
> obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require 
> consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition 
> against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>
> —
> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>
>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>
>>  Hello,
>>
>> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on 
>> this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty of 
>> 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the 
>> infringement is.
>>
>> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Henning
>>
>> --
>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
>> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/>
>>
>> From: VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org>> On 
>> Behalf Of Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
>> To: Carlos Alvarez mailto:caalva...@gmail.com>>
>> Cc: VoiceOps mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>>
>> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>>
>> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi 
>> mailto:cta...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called 
>> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to 
>> be interested in who he spoke with.
>>
>> Here is a recording of the call..
>>
>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be 
>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I 
>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and found 
>> that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some 
>> mental challenges.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 List messages often arrive out of order for me, and I think that happened
here.  I may have been misquoting.  But yeah, I’ve never heard of a law
against sharing lawful recordings.

I think it should be legal for me to publicize recordings of me harassing
scammers, right?

On Sep 20, 2023 at 9:07:22 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> I thought I stated the recording law accurately?
>
> I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording
> per se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording.
> As far as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute
> against this as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.
>
> -- Alex
>
> On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>
> I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).
> There are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most
> are single party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where
> you are not involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
>
>
> It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.
> What if someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?
> Further, what if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party
> state, and they call a single party state?  Etc.
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> > Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if
> consent was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does
> it require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific
> prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>
> >
>
> > —
>
> > Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>
> >
>
> >> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>  Hello,
>
> >>
>
> >> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly
> on this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>
> >> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a
> penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how
> serious the infringement is.
>
> >>
>
> >> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>
> >>
>
> >> Cheers,
>
> >>
>
> >> Henning
>
> >>
>
> >> --
>
> >> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
>
> >> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com
>
> >>
>
> >> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of
> Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
>
> >> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
>
> >> To: Carlos Alvarez 
>
> >> Cc: VoiceOps 
>
> >> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>
> >>
>
> >> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>
> >>
>
> >>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>
> >>
>
> >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi 
> wrote:
>
> >> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
> be interested in who he spoke with.
>
> >>
>
> >> Here is a recording of the call..
>
> >>
>
> >>
> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> >> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>
> >>
>
> >> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> >> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
> mental challenges.
>
> >>
>
> >> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps]

Hello Alex,

Thanks for the clarification. I don't want to start a legal discussion; in the 
end we are probably no lawyers.  

yes, at least in German/European law this are two different things. Its of 
course much easier to record a call, especially if one side (like the customer) 
give consent to it. This happens all the time e.g. for purchases or quality 
assurance calls, similar as in the US I assume.

Sharing a recorded call publicly is another thing, and more restricted for 
obvious reasons.

Cheers,

Henning

-- 
Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com

> -Original Message-
> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of Alex
> Balashov via VoiceOps
> Sent: Mittwoch, 20. September 2023 18:07
> To: VoiceOps 
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
> 
> I thought I stated the recording law accurately?
> 
> I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording per
> se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As far
> as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against 
> this
> as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.
> 
> -- Alex
> 
> > On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps
>  wrote:
> >
> > I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  
> > There are
> only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are single
> party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are not
> involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
> >
> > It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What 
> > if
> someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, what 
> if
> the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and they call a 
> single
> party state?  Etc.
> >
> >
> > On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps
>  wrote:
> >> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent 
> >> was
> obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require
> consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition
> against publicising it that I'm aware of.
> >>
> >> —
> >> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
> >>
> >>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps
>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Hello,
> >>>
> >>> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on
> this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
> >>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a
> penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious
> the infringement is.
> >>>
> >>> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Henning
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services –
> >>> https://gilawa.com
> >>>
> >>> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of
> >>> Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
> >>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
> >>> To: Carlos Alvarez 
> >>> Cc: VoiceOps 
> >>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
> >>>
> >>> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
> >>>
> >>>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023
> %5F
> >>> September%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-
> EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F716961616
> >>> 1%5F714
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi 
> wrote:
> >>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to be
> interested in who he spoke with.
> >>>
> >>> Here is a recording of the call..
> >>>
> >>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layout
> >>>
> s/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocume
> nts%
> >>>
> 2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4
> 845791377%
> >>> 5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps
>  wrote:
> >>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be 
> >>> alarmist,
> but it’s worth asking ar

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Alex Balashov via VoiceOps]

I thought I stated the recording law accurately? 

I think Henning was inquiring not so much about the legality of recording per 
se (which you have accurately addressed) as publicising the recording. As far 
as I know, US state and federal laws do not have a specific statute against 
this as long as the recording was legally made in the first place.

-- Alex

> On Sep 20, 2023, at 12:03 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
> 
> I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).  There 
> are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most are 
> single party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where you are 
> not involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.
> 
> It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What 
> if someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further, 
> what if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and 
> they call a single party state?  Etc.
> 
> 
> On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
>> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent 
>> was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it 
>> require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific 
>> prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>> 
>> —
>> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>> 
>>> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>  Hello,
>>>  
>>> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on 
>>> this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>>> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty 
>>> of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the 
>>> infringement is.
>>>  
>>> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>>>  
>>> Cheers,
>>>  
>>> Henning
>>>  
>>> -- 
>>> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
>>> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com
>>>  
>>> From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of Christopher 
>>> Aloi via VoiceOps
>>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
>>> To: Carlos Alvarez 
>>> Cc: VoiceOps 
>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>>>  
>>> Here is another link if that one didn't work - 
>>>  
>>> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>>>  
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  wrote:
>>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called 
>>> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to 
>>> be interested in who he spoke with.  
>>>  
>>> Here is a recording of the call..
>>>  
>>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be 
>>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I 
>>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and 
>>> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>>  
>>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some 
>>> mental challenges.
>>>  
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone with 
>>> a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping for 
>>> new VoIP handsets)
>>> 
>>> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
>>> >  wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > Hey All,
>>> > 
>>> > I have a new one.
>>> > 
>>> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an 
>>> > individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't 
>>> > figur

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 I’m surprised that you’re not aware of the laws on this (or lack of).
There are only a small number of states with all party consent laws, most
are single party.  You just can’t record a third-party conversation where
you are not involved, and they don’t know you’re recording.

It leads to a complexity that I’m trying to help a customer with now.  What
if someone in AZ (single party) calls a person in CA (all party)?  Further,
what if the server is in AZ, but the caller is in an all party state, and
they call a single party state?  Etc.


On Sep 20, 2023 at 2:16:02 AM, Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent
> was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it
> require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific
> prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.
>
> —
> Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.
>
> On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on
> this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
>
> Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty
> of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the
> infringement is.
>
>
>
> About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Henning
>
>
>
> --
>
> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
>
> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com
>
>
>
> *From:* VoiceOps  *On Behalf Of *Christopher
> Aloi via VoiceOps
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
> *To:* Carlos Alvarez 
> *Cc:* VoiceOps 
> *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?
>
>
>
> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>
>
>
>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  wrote:
>
> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
> be interested in who he spoke with.
>
>
>
> Here is a recording of the call..
>
>
>
>
> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
> mental challenges.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone with
> a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping for
> new VoIP handsets)
>
> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > I have a new one.
> >
> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
> calling our company.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ___
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> --
> Alex Balashov
> Principal Consultant
> Evariste Systems LLC
> Web: https://evaristesys.com
> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> 

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Alex Balashov via VoiceOps]

Under US law, if the recording was obtained lawfully (that is, if consent was obtained from both parties, or if the US state in question does it require consent from both parties, only one party), there is no specific prohibition against publicising it that I'm aware of.—Sent from mobile, apologies for brevity and errors.On Sep 20, 2023, at 3:52 AM, Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps  wrote:







Hello,
 
kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on this list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty of 2 up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the infringement is.
 
About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.
 
Cheers,
 
Henning
 
-- 

Henning Westerholt –
https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services –
https://gilawa.com
 



From: VoiceOps 
On Behalf Of Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
To: Carlos Alvarez 
Cc: VoiceOps 
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?


 

Here is another link if that one didn't work - 

 


https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714


 


On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi <cta...@gmail.com> wrote:



I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to be interested in who he spoke with.  

 


Here is a recording of the call..


 


https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1


 


 


 


On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:




Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and found that an employee was
 being stalked/harassed.

 


On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:



Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some mental challenges.

 


On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:


Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping for new VoIP handsets)

> On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
> 
> Hey All,
> 
> I have a new one.
> 
> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when questioned.  He said multiple times he
 wanted his number to be blocked from calling our company.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-- 
Alex Balashov
Principal Consultant
Evariste Systems LLC
Web: https://evaristesys.com
Tel: +1-706-510-6800

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops




___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops





___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops








___VoiceOps mailing listVoiceOps@voiceops.orghttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Henning Westerholt via VoiceOps]

Hello,

kind of interesting that you post a recording of incoming call publicly on this 
list. For the record, I did not listen to it.
Under German law this would be probably a criminal offence with a penalty of 2 
up to 5 years prison, depending on your position and how serious the 
infringement is.

About the US laws you know of course better, I was just surprised.

Cheers,

Henning

--
Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/>

From: VoiceOps  On Behalf Of Christopher Aloi 
via VoiceOps
Sent: Dienstag, 19. September 2023 19:32
To: Carlos Alvarez 
Cc: VoiceOps 
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

Here is another link if that one didn't work -

https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi 
mailto:cta...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called twice 
and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to be 
interested in who he spoke with.

Here is a recording of the call..

https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1



On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be alarmist, 
but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I noticed some 
crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and found that an 
employee was being stalked/harassed.

On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some mental 
challenges.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone with a 
compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping for new 
VoIP handsets)

> On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>
> Hey All,
>
> I have a new one.
>
> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an individual 
> asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure out his end 
> game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when questioned.  He 
> said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from calling our 
> company.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>
> Chris
>
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org<mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

--
Alex Balashov
Principal Consultant
Evariste Systems LLC
Web: https://evaristesys.com
Tel: +1-706-510-6800

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org<mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org<mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org<mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Brian :: via VoiceOps]

First of all fair play to jay, he handled it well.

Could this be someone who suspects he's been blocked from calling an ex or
someone he's been contacting who's blocked him. He has suspicions that this
is what's happened and wants to see what happens when his numbers blocked?

I can't see any other motivations fraudulent or otherwise for this. Unless
he's simply really unwell, which is kinda sad.

Maybe manager should call him back and really try to unravel wtf is going
on.


On Tue 19 Sept 2023, 18:32 Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps, <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>
>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  wrote:
>
>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
>> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
>> be interested in who he spoke with.
>>
>> Here is a recording of the call..
>>
>>
>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
>>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
>>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
>>> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>>
>>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
>>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>
 Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
 mental challenges.

 On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
 voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone
> with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping
> for new VoIP handsets)
>
> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > I have a new one.
> >
> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't 
> figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked 
> from
> calling our company.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ___
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> --
> Alex Balashov
> Principal Consultant
> Evariste Systems LLC
> Web: https://evaristesys.com
> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
 ___
 VoiceOps mailing list
 VoiceOps@voiceops.org
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

>>> ___
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 That’s a real WTF right there.  “I need boundaries.”  That sounded genuine.

Also, admit it, the “manager” you needed while he was on hold was all of
you laughing your asses off and there’s no manager right?


On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:31:53 AM, Christopher Aloi  wrote:

> Here is another link if that one didn't work -
>
>
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  wrote:
>
>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
>> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
>> be interested in who he spoke with.
>>
>> Here is a recording of the call..
>>
>>
>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
>>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
>>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
>>> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>>
>>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
>>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>
 Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
 mental challenges.

 On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
 voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone
> with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping
> for new VoIP handsets)
>
> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > I have a new one.
> >
> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't 
> figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked 
> from
> calling our company.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ___
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> --
> Alex Balashov
> Principal Consultant
> Evariste Systems LLC
> Web: https://evaristesys.com
> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
 ___
 VoiceOps mailing list
 VoiceOps@voiceops.org
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

>>> ___
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Paul Timmins via VoiceOps]

I wonder if the plan is to spoof a victim's number and  get people to block 
someone who is about to be victimized to prevent them from complaining or 
stopping some form of fraud that they're planning.

Did the stir/shaken header on this call indicate it came from Verizon Wireless?

> On Sep 19, 2023, at 1:31 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
> 
> Here is another link if that one didn't work - 
> 
> https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714
> 
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  > wrote:
>> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called 
>> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to 
>> be interested in who he spoke with.  
>> 
>> Here is a recording of the call..
>> 
>> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps 
>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
>>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be 
>>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I 
>>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and 
>>> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>> 
>>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
>>> mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
 Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some 
 mental challenges.
 
 On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
 mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone 
> with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive 
> shopping for new VoIP handsets)
> 
> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
> > mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>> wrote:
> > 
> > Hey All,
> > 
> > I have a new one.
> > 
> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an 
> > individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't 
> > figure out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain 
> > why when questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be 
> > blocked from calling our company.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> > 
> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> > 
> > Chris
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org 
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> -- 
> Alex Balashov
> Principal Consultant
> Evariste Systems LLC
> Web: https://evaristesys.com 
> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
> 
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org 
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
 
 ___
 VoiceOps mailing list
 VoiceOps@voiceops.org 
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>> ___
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org 
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps]

Here is another link if that one didn't work -

https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/0dff3yxAUUyWu_Nd9ddlMGY8w#2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST-EDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:19 PM Christopher Aloi  wrote:

> I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
> twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
> be interested in who he spoke with.
>
> Here is a recording of the call..
>
>
> https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
>> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
>> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
>> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
>>> mental challenges.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
>>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>
 Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone
 with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping
 for new VoIP handsets)

 > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
 voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
 >
 > Hey All,
 >
 > I have a new one.
 >
 > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
 individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
 out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
 questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
 calling our company.
 >
 > Thoughts?
 >
 > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
 >
 > Chris
 >
 >
 > ___
 > VoiceOps mailing list
 > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
 > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

 --
 Alex Balashov
 Principal Consultant
 Evariste Systems LLC
 Web: https://evaristesys.com
 Tel: +1-706-510-6800

 ___
 VoiceOps mailing list
 VoiceOps@voiceops.org
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

>>> ___
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>> ___
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps]

I appreciate the concern, and the thought crossed our minds.  He called
twice and once ended up in sales and once in support and he didn't seem to
be interested in who he spoke with.

Here is a recording of the call..

https://vaspian-my.sharepoint.com/personal/caloi_vaspian_com/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fcaloi%5Fvaspian%5Fcom%2FDocuments%2F2023%5FSeptember%5F19%5F095014%5FEST%2DEDT%5FInbound%5F4845791377%5F7169616161%5F714%2Emp3=1



On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:12 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
> alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
> noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
> found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.
>
> On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
>> mental challenges.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone
>>> with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping
>>> for new VoIP handsets)
>>>
>>> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
>>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hey All,
>>> >
>>> > I have a new one.
>>> >
>>> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
>>> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
>>> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
>>> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
>>> calling our company.
>>> >
>>> > Thoughts?
>>> >
>>> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>>> >
>>> > Chris
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > VoiceOps mailing list
>>> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alex Balashov
>>> Principal Consultant
>>> Evariste Systems LLC
>>> Web: https://evaristesys.com
>>> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>>>
>>> ___
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>> ___
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Mark Wiater via VoiceOps]

there are a number of service providers reporting this behavior, I 
haven't seen any real conclusions about what they are up to though


On 9/19/2023 1:11 PM, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be 
alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where 
I noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, 
and found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.


On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
 wrote:
Ha!  He did say "he has no self control". Maybe just someone 
with some mental challenges.


On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps 
 wrote:


Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or
anyone with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g.
compulsive shopping for new VoIP handsets)

> On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps
 wrote:
>
> Hey All,
>
> I have a new one.
>
> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from
an individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I
can't figure out his end game. He's tried multiple times and
didn't explain why when questioned.  He said multiple times he
wanted his number to be blocked from calling our company.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>
> Chris
>
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-- 
Alex Balashov

Principal Consultant
Evariste Systems LLC
Web: https://evaristesys.com
Tel: +1-706-510-6800

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops


___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops


--
Mark Wiater
Greybeam, Inc
443.270.4570

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 Is it possible that he’s fixated on a specific employee?  Not to be
alarmist, but it’s worth asking around.  I once had a situation where I
noticed some crazy calling activity in a log, just by coincidence, and
found that an employee was being stalked/harassed.

On Sep 19, 2023 at 10:08:33 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
> mental challenges.
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone
>> with a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping
>> for new VoIP handsets)
>>
>> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hey All,
>> >
>> > I have a new one.
>> >
>> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
>> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
>> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
>> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
>> calling our company.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > VoiceOps mailing list
>> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>> --
>> Alex Balashov
>> Principal Consultant
>> Evariste Systems LLC
>> Web: https://evaristesys.com
>> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>>
>> ___
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps]

Ha!  He did say "he has no self control".  Maybe just someone with some
mental challenges.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:05 PM Alex Balashov via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone with
> a compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping for
> new VoIP handsets)
>
> > On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > I have a new one.
> >
> > We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
> calling our company.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ___
> > VoiceOps mailing list
> > VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> --
> Alex Balashov
> Principal Consultant
> Evariste Systems LLC
> Web: https://evaristesys.com
> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Alex Balashov via VoiceOps]

Does your company provide anything of interests to addicts, or anyone with a 
compulsive habit they are trying to kick? (e.g. compulsive shopping for new 
VoIP handsets)

> On Sep 19, 2023, at 12:52 PM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hey All,
> 
> I have a new one.
> 
> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an individual 
> asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure out his end 
> game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when questioned.  He 
> said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from calling our 
> company.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-- 
Alex Balashov
Principal Consultant
Evariste Systems LLC
Web: https://evaristesys.com
Tel: +1-706-510-6800

___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps]

Ha!
We did ask the "why" he just kept asking.  It's very odd, I just can't
figure out the end game.  He's called a few times.

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:03 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Well, did you ask him?  And then, what will you do if he starts calling
> repeatedly…block him…?  LOL
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2023 at 9:52:53 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
> voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> Hey All,
>>
>> I have a new one.
>>
>> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
>> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
>> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
>> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
>> calling our company.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> ___
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Request to block number?

[Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps]

 Well, did you ask him?  And then, what will you do if he starts calling
repeatedly…block him…?  LOL


On Sep 19, 2023 at 9:52:53 AM, Christopher Aloi via VoiceOps <
voiceops@voiceops.org> wrote:

> Hey All,
>
> I have a new one.
>
> We (hosted phone provider) have received three calls today from an
> individual asking us to block him from calling our company.  I can't figure
> out his end game.  He's tried multiple times and didn't explain why when
> questioned.  He said multiple times he wanted his number to be blocked from
> calling our company.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Could it be a social engineering attempt?  What for?
>
> Chris
>
>
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops